FactCheck.org still trying to cover its ass.

[ProSense]

Bain: Still ‘No Evidence’

<...>

Some impressive reporting by the AP and others recently has shown that Romney retained ownership and corporate titles at Bain for a time after he took a hurried leave of absence on Feb. 11, 1999, to manage the 2002 Winter Olympics. That has been shown by any number of routine corporate disclosures with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and Romney even signed some of them.

But we’ve seen no evidence so far to show that Romney was actually running Bain, even part-time and from a distance of nearly 2,100 miles, as the Obama campaign wishes voters to believe. And we’ve seen no evidence to contradict what Romney has certified repeatedly to be true (under pain of federal prosecution): that he “has not had any active role” with Bain or “been involved in the operations” since that time.

<...>

That’s technically accurate, in the sense that Romney was still “technically in charge,” to quote the Globe’s story. So we put the more recent ads in the category of “accurate but misleading” because they fail to note that there’s no evidence Romney himself made the decisions being criticized.

<...>

That’s a matter of opinion, as Sargent notes. Is Romney to some degree responsible for decisions made by others in his absence? We’ll leave questions like that to pundits, and voters. But based on the facts, there’s still nothing to show that Romney made the decisions the Obama campaign claimed he did.

http://factcheck.org/2012/07/bain-still-no-evidence/

"Impressive reporting"? WTF?

"Leave it to pundits"?

Make a damn definitive statement about the facts. You know the filings, Romney's position as sole owner, chairman, CEO and President, and his testimony and statements. Take a damn position on the facts and stop trying to campaign against the Obama administration.

Factcheck.org can't take its head out of Romney's ass (updated)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021020033

AP on Romney's "complicated business relationship"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021020324

[NNN0LHI]

1. I think Fact Check needs to get out of the facts business and turn it over to Snopes

[jberryhill]

2. They have no evidence he was running it BEFORE 1999

What do they accept as evidence that he was "engaged" at Bain in, say, January 1999?

[Cali_Democrat]

3. Romney's word and job title....

as sole owner, chairman, CEO and President of Bain Capital.

[jberryhill]

4. Right

So, what is it that changed, in their view?

If they simply take it on faith that he was exhibiting the unspecified level of "activity" before February 1999, and it changed, then they should be able to at least describe in what way his role changed.

[Cali_Democrat]

6. You ask an excellent question. n/t

[ProSense]

7. The whole

piece is beyond bizarre. They dismiss the AP fact check, and then proceed to call out the Obama campaign and its supporters (referencing Greg Sargent later in the piece).

Some impressive reporting by the AP and others recently has shown that Romney retained ownership and corporate titles at Bain for a time after he took a hurried leave of absence on Feb. 11, 1999, to manage the 2002 Winter Olympics. That has been shown by any number of routine corporate disclosures with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and Romney even signed some of them.

But we’ve seen no evidence so far to show that Romney was actually running Bain, even part-time and from a distance of nearly 2,100 miles, as the Obama campaign wishes voters to believe. And we’ve seen no evidence to contradict what Romney has certified repeatedly to be true (under pain of federal prosecution): that he “has not had any active role” with Bain or “been involved in the operations” since that time.

Nothing is evidence, and nothing trumps Romney's word.

Since FactCheck is the arbiter of what Romney "has certified repeatedly to be true (under pain of federal prosecution)," are these two statements true, or is it up the pundits to decide?

– <...>

– 2002: “(T)here were a number of social trips and business trips that brought me back to Massachusetts, board meetings, Thanksgiving and so forth.”

– 2012: “I was in Salt Lake City for three straight years. I don’t recall even coming back once to go to a Bain or management meeting. We were, I was out there running the Olympics and it was a full time job, I can tell you that.”

- more -

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/07/13/516951/romney-interview-directly-contradicts-his-previous-statements-about-bain-tenure

When is FactCheck going to address that?

Yes, Romney Perjured Himself
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002960206

[RedStateLiberal]

5. It's not just about the decisions he may or not have made at Bain.

It's about responsibility and accountability.

Romney only wants to accept responsibility for the positive things Bain did and refuses to accept any criticism for the negative things Bain did while he was the CEO. That says a lot about his character right there.

[ProSense]

8. When is FactCheck

"It's about responsibility and accountability. "

...going to address Mitt's retroactive retirement?

Are they going to claim he was gone before he wasn't gone?

[RedStateLiberal]

11. I've given up on FactCheck

I guess it's a good lesson to always fact check the fact checkers ane question everything.

[bunnies]

9. I suppose he closed his eyes when signed all the papers.

Gimme a fucking break.

[ProSense]

10. Yeah,

"I suppose he closed his eyes when signed all the papers."

...and then he retroactively opened his eyes.

[bunnies]

12. lol!

Just enough to see where to sign though.